New Gun Laws in Connecticut

I live in CT. They are about to pass what is being called the strictest gun control law in the country, this in response to the Newtown shooting.

First, let me be clear. I have no problem with reasonable laws pertaining to weapons ownership. I am not so naive as to think that we're ever going to see a country with virtually no restrictions on weapons ownership. So I am okay with saying that persons convicted of violent felonies should not be allowed to own guns. (However, I do not agree that persons convicted of non-violent felonies should be barred from gun ownership.)

But the new CT laws go way too far. They are not about protecting anyone. They are about punishing all gun owners for the actions of a lone, deranged individual. If you have not yet read about the new laws, you should. They are a doozy.

And here's the thing: The new CT laws don't even address one of the key central characteristics of the Newtown shooting; that is, that the guns used in Newtown were for all practical purposes stolen. It is my understanding that they belong to the mother, and that the shooter took them from the gun safe. So why didn't the CT legislature respond by increasing penalties for anyone who steals another person's gun?

Instead, the laws require permits to buy ammunition. (You heard me right.) The laws impose such draconian restrictions on the ownership of large capacity magazines that they have effectively banned them. You cannot buy new LCMs (over ten rounds capacity), and if you currently own them, you have to register them with the state police and can only have them loaded in your home or at a shooting range. And the new laws mean that being in possession of a non-registered LCM will actually result in stiffer penalties under CT law than being in possession of a Thermo-nuclear device. This despite the fact that the Newtown shooter dropped and swapped magazines so frequently that for all practical purposes he was employing non-LCMs.

And the CT law bans some 100 or more of what it calls Assault Weapons.

I celebrated news of the impending passage of this law by buying myself a brand new Tikka T3 Lite 7mm. Even before the new laws come into effect, buying this weapon has been an onerous process. The statement made by anti-Second Amnedment people that anyone can just walk into a gun shop and buy a weapon is absolutely false, at least here in CT.

BTW, this new law is being touted by both Democrats and Republicans here in CT. There is no opposition party anymore.

How would I have drafted a reasonable gun law? First, serious prison time for anyone who steals another person's gun, even if the gun owner is a relative. Second, how about tax credits for gun owners to purchase gun safes. Third, don't rush off imposing new state regulations before you see what the federal requirements are going to be. Fourth, if a person has a federal security clearance, (as I do), then that should be enough to satisfy any federal or state requirements for gun ownership.

Since I actually work in Northern Massachusetts, I am thinking about moving to Southern Vermont, where the laws are more reasonable.

So CT, here's the thing. I'm a successful, hard working, tax paying husband and father who really doesn't think your state is worth living in anymore. When people like me leave, who's going to be left?

Let me first say that I am truly sorry for the tragedy that has taken place in your state such as the cowardly murders of innocent people & children . I don't think it is fair to you at all ! These new gun laws will no stop the killings . Do they think that the dope smokers and meth heads will seek out a permit to buy drugs ? Do they (Liberals) think that a Ban on drugs would work ? Why of course not the druggies will still get their drugs and so the deranged individuals will still get a gun ! It is Illegal to grow pot or smoke it in my state and people keep growing it and smoking it. Why can't Obama and his electors see this ???

I herd today that Stag Arms is moving to Texas . Because of this CT gun law restriction. I say good for any business that takes their money to another state . a friend of mine told me that he read it on NRA's website.

I hate that good people like you will have to pay for STUPID state decisions!!
But I say move out of CT .......
I like the point that you made . If they really wanted to do something that had a major part in the killings at CT then they would have made stiffer laws
concerning "stealing" but the real agenda here is to do away with guns......

Here is a good point to debate them with . If these new gun laws have been the result of several kids murdered and the Government really cared then the Government would stop the legal murder of babies known as Abortion !! I am in no way making light of what has happened in CT please don't misunderstand me, but they are millions of Innocent Babies killed (Murdered) every year in this country ,so if this was brought about because of the value of "life" then the Government would do something with ABORTION!!!!!

jackdogstar---I see that this is your first post on LRH---Welcome!
I'm sorry for you and others that live in CT as well as CO as well as CA and so on and so on. It is a travesty on what is happening in this country and in my opinion, it is not going to get any better unless something drastic happens. In your post you say that you are for REASONABLE weapon restrictions. You already have them and there are laws all over this country against illegal firearm related crimes. More laws are not going to do ANYTHING to prevent a nutjob from doing what they want to do. All it will do is hurt people like you, me and the rest of hardworking, lawabiding, honest folks.
I spent 22 years with a very large sheriffs department on the west coast and I've seen it all. You know how many homicides that I have been to that involve an assault weapon? 0. Does that change anything that occurred in your state or any other mass murder? No. It does not change anything---children were murdered and it still makes me sick.
Yes, I know that it happens but it always will to some degree---there is evil in the world and the only way to combat that is fight bad with good. I have absolutely HAD it with politicians hurting the good people. You also say in your post that if you leave, who will be left? Well, who will be left are people that want to be lead and want to be in that kind of world. I, for one, don't. And that is one of the reasons I live in Idaho.
I also know that it is not easy to just to pack up and leave but that is a choice you will have to ponder.
Keep after your politicians--let them know how you feel and KEEP AFTER THEM.

Good luck.

Randy

__________________"Every man has a purpose---------mine is to be behind a rifle.........."

"I'd rather wake up in the middle of nowhere than be in any city on earth." ---Steve McQueen

Here's the really insidious thing about these new laws. They make felonies of many innocuous activities related to guns. The Large Capacity Magazine provisions are a good example. Under the new law, you have to register LCMs with the state police. So let's say that somewhere in the pile of junk in your basement you happen to have a stray LCM. And let's say you don't even have what CT calls an assault weapon. You just have hunting rifles and this stray LCM. If you get caught with this, you can be convicted of a felony and lose ALL your "privileges" to own guns. (Yeah, I know. I thought it was a Right, too, protected by the Second Amendment.)

Everybody thinks they're gonna come, break down our doors, and do a mass confiscation of guns. But that's not how they do it these days. The way they do it is to make silly laws like possession of LCMs into a felony and then come and get gun owners one at a time.

I've been thinking about a legal response to these new laws, and I think what is needed is a federal initiative to pass federal legislation to pre-empt these state laws. Congress can do this via its Commerce Clause power. Federal pre-emption is an effective tool if done right. By way of explanation, the reason credit card companies can charge high interest rates despite state usury laws is that the Supreme Court found that federal law pre-empted state law. Trying to fight these state anti-gun laws on a state by state basis is simply too expensive and inefficient. And once you get a federal pre-emption statute in place, the rules of the Senate regarding 60 votes to break a filibuster make it really hard for anti-Second Amendment types to undo them.

I was at Cabellas yesterday, buying ammo before the restrictions take effect, (because FU, CT!). The lady at the counter made a good point. When I was a Boy Scout, getting to shoot .22 rifles was a big, exciting part of Boy Scout camp. Well, the Cabellas lady pointed out that with the new laws, they can't do that anymore. The laws effectively make it impossible for kids, like my eight year old son, to legally learn safe gun handling.

I understand your frustration having had to move to Massachusetts due to my job. It's a terrible feeling living in a state that you absolutely hate and are helpless to effect the irrational behavior of idiotic politicians(there are a few exceptions but they can't be counted on one hand). Only aspect that is a bright light is GOAL, the Gun Owners Action League, that keeps some level of sanity alive and fights hard for our rights. The same issue that plagues our country, plagues states like Massachusetts. There are enough resident gun owners to crush the ambitions of these people that want our guns, but they are generally silent until it's too late or not at all. Less than 5% of the gun owners in this country belong to the NRA. Similar stats apply to GoAL in our state. Any chance of the Obama/local state agendas being crushed will be the effect of the NRA, and other gun Association's lobby power. If just 20% of 60+ million gun owners were members of the NRA we wouldn't be having this discussion. If the OP thinks he will be safe in Vermont, better think twice. This blue state actually has a Rep that is a publicly declared socialist with a very strong voice. They caved in on health care. It's only a matter of time before Vermont, Maine, and New Hampshire follows suite under the current wave. I apologize for the rant and hate to sound so negative, but the only way for us to keep our rights is to get all of us active. IMO.

I joined Gun Owners of America this morning. My understanding is that they are a little more proactive right now than the NRA. I did not think the NRA response to Newtown was effective. I think the NRA should have emphasized that the guns used in Newtown were stolen by the shooter from his mother, and the NRA should have emphasized laws to protect responsible gun owners from real criminals, such as stiffer penalties for anyone who steals someone else's gun. Just my two cents, for what it's worth.

And GreyFox makes a good point. It's absurd to assume that people can simply leave a state if they don't like the politics. That's why we have a U.S. Constitution-- to set a minimum standard of protection of Rights that should survive any economic or social needs. That may be why Federal pre-emption of anti-Second Amendment laws might be the best course of action. Fighting these battles state by state is just not working.